Short answer Rick: whatever changes you make in your local record in Workflows will not impact the master record in OCLC whatsoever. They are separate entities. Which is why I thought it wise that you are conducting your work in the manner that you are if you are uncertain of the OCLC infrastructure and possible ramifications if you go into OCLC and make any kind of change to a master record to begin with. So, if you are simply going into OCLC, finding matching copy for a map you have in hand (or at least what you feel is matching copy based on one or more matching parameters between record content and what you see on the map), downloading it to Workflows via SmartPort, and then doing any level of editing/changing, you are not impacting the master record that resides in OCLC because it is a copy of that record that goes through the download process. Maybe that makes you feel more comfortable? Thanks for sharing in particular that your institution is using RDA and thus you are as well, and that you do have experience in making changes based on the differences between AACR2-level information in the record and what is expected in RDA. Personally, I really didn't mind the phase of hybrid records when we went through it because I understand why it was decided to do that as opposed to waiting for an unknown amount of time (at that time) for when RDA was declared a new standard and implemented. Its also great that OCLC came up with a way to machine-manipulate records in OCLC (the majority of them anyway) to add in the 33X fields and do a few more things that for awhile we were forced to do manually (and that's when I gritted my teeth for a period of time). Frankly, what I truly dislike seeing and having to spend much time on is our own records created in the 1980s and 1990s that were uploaded into OCLC when we switched from a homegrown system to Sirsi because the quality of these minimal-level records is embarrassing. Thankfully, as we come down the homestretch of retrospectively converting our bib. records here at Penn State we get to enhance each of these to full-level BIBCO works, and I'm much more satisfied with that. Paige p.s. I don't know about other map catalogers, but I very regularly use the OCLC record maintenance system to request that duplicate map records be merged, found here: https://www.oclc.org/forms/record-quality.en.html. That said, OCLC's quality control unit has a set of hierarchies in place related to when NOT to merge duplicate records (for instance, I'm pretty sure that a record created by the Library of Congress or a national library elsewhere is never merged with an institution-supplied record) and I trust them to do the right thing on their end. From: "Rick Grapes" <[log in to unmask]> To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 3:12:14 PM Subject: clarification Hi all, I’ve read the responses to my OCLC question so far, and thought I should submit a few clarifications. I am cataloging solely in RDA. That’s policy now for our library. I have updated some AACR2 records to RDA in Sirsi. And I’m doing more than just adding a few 33x fields when I do these upgrades to PCC. Hopefully the mapping community won’t find any glaring errors in my work. The creation of hybrid records rubs me wrong too. But my initial question remains. How do I know if, and in what manner, the changes I make locally will impact OCLC? I’m glad to know that OCLC is not deduping map records, but I’m sure I’ve created tons of duplicate records over the years, unknowingly. Again, thanks to all of you, for all you do. Rick Grapes “the map Nazi” No maps for you!